Subject: Re: [xsl] xslt readability/maintainability From: "Vitaly B. Rudovich" <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Sat, 08 Jun 2002 11:17:33 +0200 |
> Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2002 10:56:54 -0600 (MDT) > From: Mike Brown <mike@xxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: [xsl] xslt readability/maintainability [...] > You might be running into similar situations with your colleagues' patches, > where the lexical flexibility of XML makes the patches semantically correct > but written completely differently. While <foo></foo> vs <foo/>, attribute > order, and attribute value quoting differences are fairly tolerable when they > happen, a patch that is full of whitespace changes can be annoying and is > actively discouraged (through admonishment of the offending party, mainly), > although rarely is it a real disaster. The only real danger, IMHO, lies in > encoding differences; you don't want a utf-8 encoded patch going into an > iso-8859-1 file. If the code is checked manually it is reasonable convert all <foo></foo> to <foo />, order all attributes in the same way (for instance by name) and reformat whitespaces with an automatical tool. -- Vit(aly B.) Rudovich mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.VRudovich.com XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] xslt readability/maintain, Vitaly B. Rudovich | Thread | [xsl] newbie: multiple output files, Heather Adler |
Re: [xsl] xslt readability/maintain, Vitaly B. Rudovich | Date | Re: [xsl] arguments with ", Jonathan Furrer |
Month |